This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for a direction upon respondent No.1 to take the primary school/primary section of the institution on grants in aid. It is stated that ' Swargiya Thakur Ramnath Singh Jjunior High School Samiti, Bagai Kala, Post Umri, Tehsil Phulpur, District Allahabad' has established the educational institution in the name of 'Thakur Ramnath Singh Prathamik Pathshala Bagai Kala, Bagai Khurd, Phulpur, District Allahabad, which has been granted permanent recognition on 26.6.1998 from class 1 to 5, and is included in the list of aided institution since 1994 under the Act of 1978.
It is stated that primary institution is functioning since 1998, for which recognition has been granted on 26.6.1998. Prayer has been made to direct the respondents to take the institutin for the purposes of grant of aid. It is contended that by virtue of a constitutional amendment, Article 21-A has been introduced, which mandates that State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age between 6 to 14 years, and The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 has also been enacted. Rules of 2011 have also been framed for the purposes.
It is stated that petitioner's claim is liable to be examined for being taken on aid, as the institution is performing the functions, which is otherwise expected to be performed by the State. It is claimed that petitioner's claim has not been examined so far. Reliance has been placed upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Paripurna Nand Tripathi and another Vs. State of U.P. and others, reported in 2015 (3) ADJ 567, to contend that petitioner's claim is liable to be examined. Following observations made in para-19 to 22 of the judgment is reproduced:-
"19. After the enactment of the Act, 2009 and the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan (supra), Bhartiya Seva Samaj Trust (supra) and State of Uttar Pradesh and others v. Pawan Kumar Divedi and others10, we are of the view that the State Government may revisit its age old policy in the light of the constitutional amendment and the law laid down by the Supreme Court on the subject.
20. Undoubtedly, now it is the State's responsibility to provide free and compulsory education to the children of the age of six to fourteen years. Private institutions, which are imparting education to children of the said age group, in fact, are performing and sharing the obligations of the State. Therefore, an obligation is cast upon the State Government not only to provide the Grant-in-aid to such institutions but to provide infrastructure also subject to reasonable conditions laid down by it. Providing education to the children of the age of six to fourteen years shall be a mirage unless qualitative education is provided to them.
21. In the State of Uttar Pradesh, the large majority of children of the said age group come from the marginalized sections of the society. Most of the institutions providing primary and basic education are situated in rural and semi-urban areas. To provide quality education it is necessary that trained and competent teachers are appointed and necessary infrastructure is also made available to such institutions. The teachers in private unaided institutions are working in pitiable conditions. No good teacher would like to work in such institutions. Thus, the students will be deprived of quality education.
22. In view of the supervening events, we are of the view that the order of the learned Single Judge dated 29 August 2014 and the order of the State Government dated 10 January 2002 need to be set aside and are, accordingly, set aside. The matter is remitted to the State Government to reconsider it in the light of the law referred to above. The State Government may reconsider its policy of 1989 in respect of the grant of aid to the unaided institutions in the light of the constitutional amendment, the Act of 2009 and the law laid down in the judgments referred above."
Learned counsel for the respondents contend that petitioner's grievance shall be considered, in accordance with law.
In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to ensure compliance of the directions issued by this Court in the case of Paripurna Nand Tripathi (supra) and frame the policy in relation to Grant-in-aid to unaided institutions in the light of the Constitutional mandate and Article 21-A and the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order before the Principal Secretary (Basic Education U.P., Lucknow).
The petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions.
Needless to mention that after the State Government takes the policy decision in the matter, the case of petitioners institution shall be dealt with accordingly.
Order Date :- 7.12.2016 n.u.